This book is an initial response to the call of the World Council of Churches for renewed theological reflection on the biblical roots of ordination to strengthen the vocational identity of the ...
More

This book is an initial response to the call of the World Council of Churches for renewed theological reflection on the biblical roots of ordination to strengthen the vocational identity of the ordained and to provide a framework for ecumenical dialogue. It is grounded in the assumption that the vocation of ordination requires an understanding of holiness and how it functions in human religious experience. The goal is to construct a biblical theology of ordination, embedded in broad reflection on the nature of holiness. The study of holiness and ministry interweaves three methodologies. First, the history of religions describes two theories of holiness in the study of religion — as a dynamic force and as a ritual resource — which play a central role in biblical literature and establish the paradigm of ordination to Word and Sacrament in Christian tradition. Second, the study of the Moses in the Pentateuch and the formation of the Mosaic office illustrate the ways in which the two views of holiness model ordination to the prophetic word and to the priestly ritual. And, third, canonical criticism provides the lens to explore the ongoing influence of the Mosaic office in the New Testament literature.Less

Holiness and Ministry : A Biblical Theology of Ordination

Thomas B Dozeman

Published in print: 2008-07-10

This book is an initial response to the call of the World Council of Churches for renewed theological reflection on the biblical roots of ordination to strengthen the vocational identity of the ordained and to provide a framework for ecumenical dialogue. It is grounded in the assumption that the vocation of ordination requires an understanding of holiness and how it functions in human religious experience. The goal is to construct a biblical theology of ordination, embedded in broad reflection on the nature of holiness. The study of holiness and ministry interweaves three methodologies. First, the history of religions describes two theories of holiness in the study of religion — as a dynamic force and as a ritual resource — which play a central role in biblical literature and establish the paradigm of ordination to Word and Sacrament in Christian tradition. Second, the study of the Moses in the Pentateuch and the formation of the Mosaic office illustrate the ways in which the two views of holiness model ordination to the prophetic word and to the priestly ritual. And, third, canonical criticism provides the lens to explore the ongoing influence of the Mosaic office in the New Testament literature.

The purpose of this chapter is to examine the national co-ordination of European Union (EU) policy in Spain. It concentrates on the processes that take place in Madrid, and using a threefold ...
More

The purpose of this chapter is to examine the national co-ordination of European Union (EU) policy in Spain. It concentrates on the processes that take place in Madrid, and using a threefold categorization, examines the mechanisms used by central government in its dealings with the other main actors involved in the process. The first set of relationships are horizontal, and relate to non-governmental actors, including the Parliament, political parties, and interest groups; the second set are vertical, or more precisely intergovernmental, and concern relations between the centre and the periphery under the surveillance of the Constitutional Court; the third set are internal, and relate to intragovernmental co-ordination within the central administration and the core executive. These three sets of relationships are examined in the three main sections of the chapter. It is argued that Spain’s politico-constitutional uniqueness has been retained, and even reinforced within the EU, and that the Spanish case appears to challenge the assumption that Europeanization is hollowing out the state, since the Spanish state, here identified with its central government, has been strengthened since accession.Less

Spain

Ignacio Molina

Published in print: 2000-08-03

The purpose of this chapter is to examine the national co-ordination of European Union (EU) policy in Spain. It concentrates on the processes that take place in Madrid, and using a threefold categorization, examines the mechanisms used by central government in its dealings with the other main actors involved in the process. The first set of relationships are horizontal, and relate to non-governmental actors, including the Parliament, political parties, and interest groups; the second set are vertical, or more precisely intergovernmental, and concern relations between the centre and the periphery under the surveillance of the Constitutional Court; the third set are internal, and relate to intragovernmental co-ordination within the central administration and the core executive. These three sets of relationships are examined in the three main sections of the chapter. It is argued that Spain’s politico-constitutional uniqueness has been retained, and even reinforced within the EU, and that the Spanish case appears to challenge the assumption that Europeanization is hollowing out the state, since the Spanish state, here identified with its central government, has been strengthened since accession.

This concluding chapter addresses the main issues raised in the Introduction and presents the general findings that emerge from the country studies. It has three main aims. First, it puts forward ...
More

This concluding chapter addresses the main issues raised in the Introduction and presents the general findings that emerge from the country studies. It has three main aims. First, it puts forward three arguments on the basis of the national investigations of policy co-ordination at the European level, and comparisons of permanent representations: the first argument is that that all the member states have responded to the co-ordination need that arises from EU policy-making and most aspire to a careful crafting of policy, but that the nature of their response varies according to the prevailing national attitude to European integration, features of the national political and administrative opportunity structures, policy style, and available resources; the second argument is that, although there are some similarities between national arrangements with respect to some aspects of organization and core functions, there are also several very substantial differences—neither the ‘convergence hypothesis’ nor the ‘continuing divergence hypothesis’ outlined in the Introduction is confirmed by the case studies, but there is evidence that many of the factors identified by each are at work; the third argument is related to effectiveness—each set of national arrangements has its own particular strengths and weaknesses, but one common factor affecting performance is the efficiency of domestic co-ordination procedures. The second aim of the Conclusion is to consider the wider implications of the findings both for the functioning of the European Union as a system and for theorizing about the EU; with respect to the former, national arrangements in Brussels do little to overcome the problem of segmentation that characterizes the EU, but concerning the latter, the case studies suggest that the intergovernmentalist image is at odds with how national policy preferences are actually formed and the nature of the role played by the permanent representations; the alternative image approach outlined above, and described in the Introduction, offers a better guide on both counts. The third and final aim of the chapter is to compare national co-ordination practices at the domestic level with those found at the European level; the contention put forward is that the domestic co-ordination of EU policy is more effective than processes at the European level.Less

Hussein KassimB. Guy Peters

Published in print: 2001-11-29

This concluding chapter addresses the main issues raised in the Introduction and presents the general findings that emerge from the country studies. It has three main aims. First, it puts forward three arguments on the basis of the national investigations of policy co-ordination at the European level, and comparisons of permanent representations: the first argument is that that all the member states have responded to the co-ordination need that arises from EU policy-making and most aspire to a careful crafting of policy, but that the nature of their response varies according to the prevailing national attitude to European integration, features of the national political and administrative opportunity structures, policy style, and available resources; the second argument is that, although there are some similarities between national arrangements with respect to some aspects of organization and core functions, there are also several very substantial differences—neither the ‘convergence hypothesis’ nor the ‘continuing divergence hypothesis’ outlined in the Introduction is confirmed by the case studies, but there is evidence that many of the factors identified by each are at work; the third argument is related to effectiveness—each set of national arrangements has its own particular strengths and weaknesses, but one common factor affecting performance is the efficiency of domestic co-ordination procedures. The second aim of the Conclusion is to consider the wider implications of the findings both for the functioning of the European Union as a system and for theorizing about the EU; with respect to the former, national arrangements in Brussels do little to overcome the problem of segmentation that characterizes the EU, but concerning the latter, the case studies suggest that the intergovernmentalist image is at odds with how national policy preferences are actually formed and the nature of the role played by the permanent representations; the alternative image approach outlined above, and described in the Introduction, offers a better guide on both counts. The third and final aim of the chapter is to compare national co-ordination practices at the domestic level with those found at the European level; the contention put forward is that the domestic co-ordination of EU policy is more effective than processes at the European level.

This book is the second of two volumes in which leading scholars examine the way in which European Union (EU) member states co-ordinate their European policies, and investigates the structures, ...
More

This book is the second of two volumes in which leading scholars examine the way in which European Union (EU) member states co-ordinate their European policies, and investigates the structures, institutions and processes put in place by national governments in Brussels. The companion volume, published in 2000, examines the national co-ordination of EU policy at the domestic level. This second book offers a comprehensive, comparative analysis of national co-ordination at the European level. It investigates the way in which eleven member states—Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden, and the United Kingdom—co-ordinate their European policy in Brussels. It examines their co-ordination ambitions, the value attached to co-ordination and their conception of it, and the strategies adopted by the member states for defining and defending a national position in EU policy-making. It looks in detail at the organization and operation of the permanent representations—the principal institution charged by governments with safeguarding the ‘national interest’ in Brussels—and at how, to what extent (indeed, whether) they succeed in reconciling their responsibilities as both agencies of the national government and part of the EU decision-making system. The book assesses the effectiveness of the various national arrangements in achieving their intended goals, and identifies the factors that influence or determine performance at the European level. The institutions, structures, and processes utilized by the member states in Brussels are compared with a view to discovering whether there is evidence of convergence around a common model or whether national differences persist. All of the chapters except for the Conclusion are extensively revised versions of papers presented at a workshop, held at Nuffield College, Oxford, on 13–14 May 1999.Less

The National Co-ordination of EU Policy : The European Level

Vincent Wright

Published in print: 2001-11-29

This book is the second of two volumes in which leading scholars examine the way in which European Union (EU) member states co-ordinate their European policies, and investigates the structures, institutions and processes put in place by national governments in Brussels. The companion volume, published in 2000, examines the national co-ordination of EU policy at the domestic level. This second book offers a comprehensive, comparative analysis of national co-ordination at the European level. It investigates the way in which eleven member states—Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden, and the United Kingdom—co-ordinate their European policy in Brussels. It examines their co-ordination ambitions, the value attached to co-ordination and their conception of it, and the strategies adopted by the member states for defining and defending a national position in EU policy-making. It looks in detail at the organization and operation of the permanent representations—the principal institution charged by governments with safeguarding the ‘national interest’ in Brussels—and at how, to what extent (indeed, whether) they succeed in reconciling their responsibilities as both agencies of the national government and part of the EU decision-making system. The book assesses the effectiveness of the various national arrangements in achieving their intended goals, and identifies the factors that influence or determine performance at the European level. The institutions, structures, and processes utilized by the member states in Brussels are compared with a view to discovering whether there is evidence of convergence around a common model or whether national differences persist. All of the chapters except for the Conclusion are extensively revised versions of papers presented at a workshop, held at Nuffield College, Oxford, on 13–14 May 1999.

This final country study describes how limited material resources impose severe constraints on the coverage of action and the type of activities that can be pursued by Ireland at the European level. ...
More

This final country study describes how limited material resources impose severe constraints on the coverage of action and the type of activities that can be pursued by Ireland at the European level. At the same time, however, it shows that policy co-ordination can be effectively achieved when relations within an administrative élite are close and there is a political consensus in favour of Europe. Ireland’s permanent representation was established at Brussels in 1967 as an EU mission, and was part of a long-term strategy to ensure that Ireland would be successful in its application for membership of the European Union. This was finally achieved in 1973. The chapter describes the size and development of the Irish permanent representation from 1967 onwards, its current working methods, its role, and its effectiveness and capacity to implement ambitions.Less

National Co‐ordination in Brussels: The Role of Ireland's Permanent Representation

Brigid Laffan

Published in print: 2001-11-29

This final country study describes how limited material resources impose severe constraints on the coverage of action and the type of activities that can be pursued by Ireland at the European level. At the same time, however, it shows that policy co-ordination can be effectively achieved when relations within an administrative élite are close and there is a political consensus in favour of Europe. Ireland’s permanent representation was established at Brussels in 1967 as an EU mission, and was part of a long-term strategy to ensure that Ireland would be successful in its application for membership of the European Union. This was finally achieved in 1973. The chapter describes the size and development of the Irish permanent representation from 1967 onwards, its current working methods, its role, and its effectiveness and capacity to implement ambitions.

This introduction starts by pointing out that entry into the European Union (EU) appears to pose even greater demands for co-ordination on its member states than that already required for the ...
More

This introduction starts by pointing out that entry into the European Union (EU) appears to pose even greater demands for co-ordination on its member states than that already required for the domestic public sector. With entry into the EU, the domain of government and action and responsibility has been extended, the complexity of decision-making has been increased and the policy stakes in many policy areas have been raised. In addition to co-ordinating their internal policy-making activities, governments must also be prepared to defend more coherent programmes at the EU level and ensure that their proposals in Brussels and their actions in their national capital are compatible. The different sections of the introduction discuss EU membership and the sources of co-ordination need, the challenge of EU policy co-ordination, and convergence and distinctiveness (divergence).Less

Introduction

Hussein KassimB. Guy PetersVincent Wright

Published in print: 2000-08-03

This introduction starts by pointing out that entry into the European Union (EU) appears to pose even greater demands for co-ordination on its member states than that already required for the domestic public sector. With entry into the EU, the domain of government and action and responsibility has been extended, the complexity of decision-making has been increased and the policy stakes in many policy areas have been raised. In addition to co-ordinating their internal policy-making activities, governments must also be prepared to defend more coherent programmes at the EU level and ensure that their proposals in Brussels and their actions in their national capital are compatible. The different sections of the introduction discuss EU membership and the sources of co-ordination need, the challenge of EU policy co-ordination, and convergence and distinctiveness (divergence).

The purpose of this Introduction to the book is to provide a point of reference and context for the eleven country studies that follow. It begins with a brief discussion of national co-ordination and ...
More

The purpose of this Introduction to the book is to provide a point of reference and context for the eleven country studies that follow. It begins with a brief discussion of national co-ordination and why it matters to governments at the European level, and then outlines the tasks and difficulties that face national co-ordinators in Brussels, looking at the EU as a political system, and at its complex institutional structure (the Council of the Union, the European Parliament, the European Commission). The following section looks at the tasks that national co-ordinators are called to perform in routine policy-making, and identifies four phases: policy initiation, policy formulation, deliberation and decision; and implementation and enforcement. A brief section on ‘heroic’ decision-making by national governments follows, and then the matter of the emergence of an overall pattern in national co-ordination—of convergence or divergence—is considered. The next section looks at the effectiveness of national arrangements in Brussels, and the concluding one introduces the eleven country case studies.Less

Introduction: Co‐ordinating National Action in Brussels

Hussein Kassim

Published in print: 2001-11-29

The purpose of this Introduction to the book is to provide a point of reference and context for the eleven country studies that follow. It begins with a brief discussion of national co-ordination and why it matters to governments at the European level, and then outlines the tasks and difficulties that face national co-ordinators in Brussels, looking at the EU as a political system, and at its complex institutional structure (the Council of the Union, the European Parliament, the European Commission). The following section looks at the tasks that national co-ordinators are called to perform in routine policy-making, and identifies four phases: policy initiation, policy formulation, deliberation and decision; and implementation and enforcement. A brief section on ‘heroic’ decision-making by national governments follows, and then the matter of the emergence of an overall pattern in national co-ordination—of convergence or divergence—is considered. The next section looks at the effectiveness of national arrangements in Brussels, and the concluding one introduces the eleven country case studies.

France has traditionally aspired to play a leading role in shaping the development of European integration, and implicit in this approach has been a vision of integration as a process within which ...
More

France has traditionally aspired to play a leading role in shaping the development of European integration, and implicit in this approach has been a vision of integration as a process within which the member states predominate. Debates within the EU are carried out, as far as the traditional French conception has it, on the basis of competing and conflicting national interests, and the effectiveness with which individual member states can shape outputs at the EU level is intrinsically related to their success in presenting coherent positions within such debates; this emphasis on coherence has led to the creation in Paris of a centralized and institutionalized system of interministerial co-ordination. Although often overlooked, 1 the French administration in Brussels also plays a key role in ensuring the coherence of national positions and in defending French interests within the EU; this is most true of the French permanent representation, whose staff represent France in most meetings of the Council of Ministers, and which is responsible for keeping Paris appraised of developments in Brussels. Paris has increasingly, however, also come to recognize the need to exert influence over the supranational institutions of the EU, and over the Commission in particular, so the French have developed strategies both for ensuring the presence of French officials within these institutions and for maintaining close contact with them. This chapter is divided into three sections: the first examines the composition, organization, internal workings, and role of the French permanent representation to the European Union; the second investigates French strategies designed to ensure both a sufficient and an effective French presence within the supranational institutions—notably the Commission and, to a lesser extent, the European Parliament; and the final section critically evaluates the performance of the French administration in Brussels, considering first its capacity to carry out its allotted tasks, and second its effectiveness, particularly in terms of its ability to further France’s EU policy objectives.Less

The French Administration in Brussels

Anand Menon

Published in print: 2001-11-29

France has traditionally aspired to play a leading role in shaping the development of European integration, and implicit in this approach has been a vision of integration as a process within which the member states predominate. Debates within the EU are carried out, as far as the traditional French conception has it, on the basis of competing and conflicting national interests, and the effectiveness with which individual member states can shape outputs at the EU level is intrinsically related to their success in presenting coherent positions within such debates; this emphasis on coherence has led to the creation in Paris of a centralized and institutionalized system of interministerial co-ordination. Although often overlooked, 1 the French administration in Brussels also plays a key role in ensuring the coherence of national positions and in defending French interests within the EU; this is most true of the French permanent representation, whose staff represent France in most meetings of the Council of Ministers, and which is responsible for keeping Paris appraised of developments in Brussels. Paris has increasingly, however, also come to recognize the need to exert influence over the supranational institutions of the EU, and over the Commission in particular, so the French have developed strategies both for ensuring the presence of French officials within these institutions and for maintaining close contact with them. This chapter is divided into three sections: the first examines the composition, organization, internal workings, and role of the French permanent representation to the European Union; the second investigates French strategies designed to ensure both a sufficient and an effective French presence within the supranational institutions—notably the Commission and, to a lesser extent, the European Parliament; and the final section critically evaluates the performance of the French administration in Brussels, considering first its capacity to carry out its allotted tasks, and second its effectiveness, particularly in terms of its ability to further France’s EU policy objectives.

The concluding chapter of the book argues that adopting a systems view in analysing production is helpful in understanding the new division of labor, and that identifying the physical aspects, ...
More

The concluding chapter of the book argues that adopting a systems view in analysing production is helpful in understanding the new division of labor, and that identifying the physical aspects, particularly the spatial aspects, may be analysed to the firm's advantage. It also looks at differentiating high-level entrepreneurship from low-level entrepreneurship, and other such issues regarding entrepreneurship and the processes and behaviors of agencies in production. Most importantly, it argues that the systems view has enabled us to view the importance of social mechanisms of co-ordination. Mutual trust among agencies is deemed essential in entrepreneurship and in international business because, as in joint ventures, it does not only minimize risks but it also lowers transaction costs for firms.Less

Summary and Conclusions

Mark Casson

Published in print: 1995-03-30

The concluding chapter of the book argues that adopting a systems view in analysing production is helpful in understanding the new division of labor, and that identifying the physical aspects, particularly the spatial aspects, may be analysed to the firm's advantage. It also looks at differentiating high-level entrepreneurship from low-level entrepreneurship, and other such issues regarding entrepreneurship and the processes and behaviors of agencies in production. Most importantly, it argues that the systems view has enabled us to view the importance of social mechanisms of co-ordination. Mutual trust among agencies is deemed essential in entrepreneurship and in international business because, as in joint ventures, it does not only minimize risks but it also lowers transaction costs for firms.

New social risks are at the forefront of the EU's social policy agenda. In part, this is because a new social risk approach fits with open market policies, which stress constraints on state ...
More

New social risks are at the forefront of the EU's social policy agenda. In part, this is because a new social risk approach fits with open market policies, which stress constraints on state interventions and the importance of adapting social provision to meet economic goals; in part because old social risk areas are so heavily occupied by existing national government policies that it is difficult to find support for innovations. During the 1980s and 1990s, a number of attempts to develop international policy harmonization were pursued. These failed due to the difficulty of achieving cross‐national consensus. There are a number of relevant directives, chiefly in the areas of equality of opportunity for men and women and other labour market issues. The most important current developments, however, are in the area of ‘soft law’ through the Open Method of Co‐ordination and the National Action Plans in relation to employment, social exclusion, pensions, health and social care. The European Employment Strategy, with its stress on ‘flexicurity’, is the most advanced of these. It is at present unclear to what extent this process will achieve substantial changes in comparison with the importance of the economic pressures from the Single European Market.Less

New Risks at the EU Level; A Spillover from Open Market Policies?

Trine P. LarsenPeter Taylor-Gooby

Published in print: 2004-09-01

New social risks are at the forefront of the EU's social policy agenda. In part, this is because a new social risk approach fits with open market policies, which stress constraints on state interventions and the importance of adapting social provision to meet economic goals; in part because old social risk areas are so heavily occupied by existing national government policies that it is difficult to find support for innovations. During the 1980s and 1990s, a number of attempts to develop international policy harmonization were pursued. These failed due to the difficulty of achieving cross‐national consensus. There are a number of relevant directives, chiefly in the areas of equality of opportunity for men and women and other labour market issues. The most important current developments, however, are in the area of ‘soft law’ through the Open Method of Co‐ordination and the National Action Plans in relation to employment, social exclusion, pensions, health and social care. The European Employment Strategy, with its stress on ‘flexicurity’, is the most advanced of these. It is at present unclear to what extent this process will achieve substantial changes in comparison with the importance of the economic pressures from the Single European Market.